R v Harpur - [2012] NZHC 1748

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2009-004-007670 [2012] NZHC 1748

THE QUEEN

v

KEVIN ALAN HARPUR

Hearing: 17 July 2012

Counsel: KA Lummis for Crown
AM Wharepouri for Prisoner

Judgment: 17 July 2012

SENTENCING NOTES OF RODNEY HANSEN J

Solicitors: Meredith Connell, P O Box 2213, Auckland (Email: Kirsten.lummis@meredithconnell.co.nz ) AM Wharepouri, P O Box 2334, Auckland 1140 (Email: mina@minalegal.co.nz )

R V KEVIN ALAN HARPUR HC AK CRI-2009-004-007670 [17 July 2012]

Charges

[1] Mr Harpur, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to charges of supplying methamphetamine, manufacturing methamphetamine, and of being in possession of material for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine.

Facts

[2] The offending came to light in the course of a police operation that took place between January and September 2009. It emerged that you were a member of a syndicate which manufactured and distributed methamphetamine. The acknowledged ring-leader was Pauline Bishop. She supplied the precursor substance ContacNT to you. The agreement was that you would convert the ContacNT to methamphetamine. You would supply half of the methamphetamine to her and keep one half for yourself.

[3] Others assisted you in the manufacturing process, including a man called Brendon Gear. On the first occasion, in January 2009, that you manufactured together, you supplied the ContacNT, presumably having received it yourself from Ms Bishop, along with other materials. On later occasions you became more involved in the manufacturing process. You and Mr Gear manufactured methamphetamine together on at least five occasions and you yourself manufactured on your own at least once. Over a period of four months approximately half of what was manufactured was supplied by you to Ms Bishop with the remainder being shared equally between you and others who had assisted, including the owner of the address where the cook was carried out.

[4] The precise amount manufactured overall is difficult to ascertain because the yield from each cooking operation varied. However, the summary of facts records that between December 2008 and April 2009 you participated in the manufacture of approximately 220 grams of methamphetamine.

[5] When the police terminated the operation on 1 April 2009, at your address they found a full one litre bottle of acetone, which is one of the substances used in the manufacture of methamphetamine, and two glass flasks containing residues known to result from the manufacture of methamphetamine.

Personal background

[6] You are a 44-year-old man, born in Te Awatmutu and raised in Otorohanga by your adoptive parents. I am told that you had a happy childhood and that you remain close to your mother and your siblings. You left Otorohanga High School at the age of 16 without formal qualifications. You undertook but did not complete an apprenticeship as a mechanic in the 1980s. Since that time you have mainly worked in the air conditioning industry and, as I understand it, at the time of the car accident, which I will refer to later on, you were in fact in business on your own as…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Harpur

Details

AGLC: R v Harpur [2012] NZHC 1748
Case: [2012] NZHC 1748
Decision Date: 17 July 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Harpur, the High Court of New Zealand heard sentencing for the defendant, Kevin Alan Harpur, who had pleaded guilty to charges of supplying methamphetamine, manufacturing methamphetamine, and being in possession of materials for manufacturing methamphetamine. The offending was part of a larger operation that involved a syndicate led by Pauline Bishop. Harpur, who had been supplied with precursor substances by Bishop, manufactured and distributed methamphetamine over several months. The court found that Harpur had manufactured approximately 220 grams of methamphetamine between December 2008 and April 2009. The court considered Harpur's personal background, including a history of methamphetamine addiction stemming from a severe brain injury he sustained in a 2002 car accident. The legal issues before the court included determining an appropriate starting point for sentencing and assessing mitigating factors such as Harpur's guilty plea and the impact of his brain injury on his culpability. After weighing the arguments from both the Crown and the defence, the court determined an eight-year starting point, recognizing Harpur's role in the syndicate but acknowledging that he was less culpable than the ringleader, Bishop. The court also considered the mitigating factors, ultimately granting a one-year reduction for these factors, resulting in a final sentence of seven years imprisonment for the manufacturing and supply charges, and three years for possession, to run concurrently. The court also recommended that Harpur undertake drug, alcohol, and psychological counselling during his sentence.

Orders